About your Search

20120929
20120929
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4 (some duplicates have been removed)
came on again. they can be game changers. 1980, ronald reagan was where romney was, behind in the polls. reagan came on and took on an incumbent president, jim cia why ther, performed well in the debates and the rest is history. it started him on his way to a landslide victory in 1980. >> do you think debates actually help voters decide which person to back if they're on the fence as to which direction to go? >> i think they make a difference, particularly for mitt romney. look, barack obama, whether you love him or dislike him, think he's a great leader or think he's failed, we kind of know what he's going to be like as president. we've had him for 3 1/2 years. mitt romney is still an open book. people have to say, do i want to live with this guy every day? is he going to be quick on his feet? how prone is he to gaffes? does he know how to spar? does he show an inner toughness? in truth the pressure is on mitt romney on this first debate to seem to be -- at least get parity with president obama or victory with the immediate pundit analysis after the game. >> when you have a challenger
, ronald reagan speech writer and adviser has long argued that there is no such thing as a bradley effect. the bradley effect is named for mayor tom bradley of los angeles when he ran against george deukmejian did not do as well in the final balloting is he had been doing in the polling. for years pundits have ascribe that to the brad the affected people are free to say they're not going to vote for african-american because they don't want to be up to the prejudice he they're talking anonymously to pollsters. and he has all the data, and i believe him, but i believe that even if the bradley effect was not true in 1982, latest here in 2012. there is a significant number of people, not for reasons related to race, but for reasons related to the nature of the democratic partisanship who are refusing to tell pollsters that they're not going to vote for president obama. there are quite frankly scared of the machine. and if you are a fan of chick-fil-a you know what i'm talking about. [applause] interestingly enough their is a potential vice presidential pick for each of these regions in each o
, who radio, when ronald reagan was on -- now, that is a republican radio station, yet they carry rush limbaugh. are you going to tell me rush limbaugh is not biased? your guess is full of beans in my opinion. thank you. guest: we have never tried to say that there is not a balance in the media system, that talk radio has not in a sense risen up because conservatives were looking for an alternative media channel where they could discuss things. when we analyze the news media, we are talking about the news media which claims to be objective. i do not think rush limbaugh claims to be objective in any way. i do not think that the liberal talk radio hosts that are out there accusing mitt romney of being a toad and a vampire would tell you they are an objective out of it. the whole question is -- the mainstream media that are the only ones being chosen to moderate our debate -- you know, there is no fox news mind control of who gets to moderate our debate. they claim to be objective. we would like to hold them accountable to that. host: did somebody really call mitt romney a toad? guest: mi
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4 (some duplicates have been removed)